Printable View
dude. I only played the unofficial demos(no official one yet?) on a high end system with best video card and all settings cranked up to max and I still like RTW graphics better overall. call me mad but that makes at least 2 of us lolQuote:
Originally Posted by Quickening
lol, upgrade a E6600 Core Duo, X1950XTX, 2 gig RAM setup? :laugh4:Quote:
Originally Posted by Husar
As others more enlightened have since posted, it's an issue with the AI and siege equipment. I can't be bothered explaining it yet again, but suffice to say when it occurs it reduces my fps from 50 to less than 1.
Well, in your estimation it is flawed and presumably unplayable. To many others this isn't the case. CA would be liable if they had released the game you are talking about, but many people don't recognise as such. Certainly, my CA "car" has got a steering wheel and tyres. It mightn't be as responsive as I hoped in some situations, but CA are releasing the suspension and low profiles to "pimp my MTW2".Quote:
Originally Posted by JFC
Yes the AI can be improved and CA have stated that they are working on just that. But, the AI, as it is, doesn't make the game useless, many people are enjoying themselves - maybe they don't know any better eh?.
As has been said, CA are working on a patch. If the patch is late, so be it. The complaining usually starts with "this game has been rushed to the shelves....", so i don't think you can have it both ways and complain if they are taking their time this time round.
You know, enough really is enough.
I fired up my computer this morning, came to the forum, and found four patch/general bug threads on the first page. The games been out a couple of weeks.
All right. A bunch of folks not happy. You haven't been happy for weeks. The number of threads where people think their individual unhappiness deserves a thread of its own is a clear sign of that.
We all get the message. However, we got the message a long, long time ago.
If you must remind everybody at least once a day of how unhappy you still are, would you all please find one thread — one that has been created already, giving plenty to choose from — and stick to it. There'd be no danger of it sinking to the bottom. There's obviously enough misery to keep it afloat.
It's gotten to the point that you have to choose up sides between being a fanboy or perpetually p*ssed off.
:laugh4:Quote:
Originally Posted by Freedom Onanist
Great idea:2thumbsup:Quote:
Originally Posted by Doug-Thompson
Well I am one and I think Louis would agree also.....MTW v1.0Quote:
I've never read anyone arguing otherwise or wanting to play with a v1.0 TW game rather than the final patched version.
Gameplay was far superior, the final patch helped in some ways but it did absolutely nothing to reinstate the valuable role of spears. The final v2.01 patch may have solved the cav swipe bug (which never really troubled me) but it totally screwed MP and reduced it to boringly low levels of cav/sword, cav/sword, cav/swo zzzzzzZZZZzzzzz.
Which is why so many have posted their dissatisfaction....much like you did only a few posts later......Quote:
That's because the AI faults was created right before the game went gold.
They tried to make the AI more aggressive on the battlefield but discovered after the game went gold that the AI was now instead extremely passive and once the game has gone gold you can't touch it unless with a patch.
If you played the pre-beta demo unscripted you can see that there is no trace of a passive AI and that the AI uses it's troops like a pro.
Good use of flanking, no suicidal generals, finding weak spots in your line etc.
I myself got beaten countless times by the AI in the pre-beta demo, it was that good.
And considering the STW AI did this six years ago, who would not be frustrated with the game in its current state?Quote:
Oh how I miss the pre-beta AI.
I miss how it attacked your line and at the same time sent 2-3 units on the flanks to go behind your lines and attack your ranged units.
It was a beautiful manouver by the AI
1000? OK name them.Quote:
Jambo is true , there are bugs but come on there are 1000 other fantastic things that make you play and play again .... yours is a point of view a bit too negative and not objective , sad to say that ... shelve the game ? come on ...
A strategy game is supposed to be challenging and M2TW is not, so what 'other' things are supposed to keep anyone playing again and again? Jambo is not the kind of person to make a statement like that without good reason.
Personally, I think CA have realised they have a hell of a lot to sort out and are beginning to wish they had never been so confident as to suggest the patch would not be long because they were aware of the passive AI and had it solved already. If it surfaces this side of Christmas I will be very surprised.
Contradictory. How can the game be awesome if the AI has a MAJOR bug? It has to be called a Beta when it was released in this state and the problem was KNOWN.Quote:
And no, I would not call the game a beta, I think it's awesome, but that does not prevent me from expecting a patch for the passive AI bug and some other minor bugs.
There are some who will not agree with you and I can not understand why they feel the need to be so positive.Quote:
AI is dumb dumb dumb..not helped by the campaign problems also...
It can be fixed for sure...let us hope...but it aint good at present...least not in the game I am playing
Precisely. And if that statement is expanded, six years down the line one would expect them to learn by previous mistakesQuote:
We, the consumer, shouldn't/don't need to understand! We want a product that works! Or at least by now have some kind of 1st patch that is starting to address problems raised to keep the interest going.
If I buy a car that gets delivered without a steering wheel and tyres I'm gonna be a bit miffed and I aint gonna become a mechanic to understand why!
It's a business I agree, however they have sold a product with problems! (and no offence to CA, quite a few!) And who decides the release date? Isn't it them and SEGA?
Oh really? So how often would you buy a car from that dealer before asking why you can't have one that does not require after sales work?Quote:
It mightn't be as responsive as I hoped in some situations, but CA are releasing the suspension and low profiles to "pimp my MTW2".
Well maybe they don't, I guess ignorance is bliss.Quote:
Yes the AI can be improved and CA have stated that they are working on just that. But, the AI, as it is, doesn't make the game useless, many people are enjoying themselves - maybe they don't know any better eh?.
Is this the first TW game you have purchased? I have to ask because it certainly seems like. The game IS rushed out and this is not the first.The patches take AGES. Would it not be a good idea to at least provide a small patch to improve the passive AI? Considering the blog and how brilliant the AI is supposed to be? I seem to recall that on VH it would be a challenge for TW vets? LOLQuote:
As has been said, CA are working on a patch. If the patch is late, so be it. The complaining usually starts with "this game has been rushed to the shelves....", so i don't think you can have it both ways and complain if they are taking their time this time round.
.........Orda
QFTQuote:
Originally Posted by Doug-Thompson
This problem is making this forum unwieldy and unapproachable. I was checking in very frequently before, but now it's become too annoying to try and search down the actually useful threads like the General's Traits, Guild Info, and Merchant income.
This issue with all the purposeful, research threads being lost in a sea of rants/raves is the reason why I'm for a dedicated research forum for MTW2, but I believe that is still being decided by the appropriate staff members whether it's justified or not.
Shrug. Not saying you have to understand, but i was responding to somebody who said they couldnt understand how the game got shipped with bugs. The reason is, basically: in software, bugs happen. The more complex the software, the more likely it is to happen. Thats how.Quote:
Originally Posted by JFC
We'd all rather the game had been bug free, but if you can name one complex strategy game that was released in that state in the last 10 years, i'd be interested to hear it. Even bog-standard RTS-by-numbers games get patched several times after release, and most of those *still* dont do anything more complex than the command & conquer did 15 years ago.
In case you havent been paying attention, there IS a patch, its in the publishers QA cycle, which means stuff like checking it doesnt format your hard drive when you install it (cos i'm sure everybody would just LOVE that) across umpteen different versions of windows and hardware, and adding the copy protection so that the all the leet crackers have something to keep them busy for another 15 minutes. This stuff takes time - about... oooooh... 2 weeks or so on average.Quote:
Or at least by now have some kind of 1st patch that is starting to address problems raised to keep the interest going.
I think it would be nice if CA kept us a bit better informed as to whats going on, but to be honest i cant blame them for keeping their heads down until they know for definite when its going to be released, cos god forbid they give a date and then have it slip - i can just imagine the tantrums.
This isnt a car. You may as well make comparisons with buying a cake for all the relevance that has. Nor, for that matter, is it a shoot em up or beat em up with the exact same gameplay as last time bolted onto a swishy new graphics engine for the next generation of consoles. Crank that handle.Quote:
If I buy a car that gets delivered without a steering wheel and tyres I'm gonna be a bit miffed and I aint gonna become a mechanic to understand why!
Unfortunately, business reality sets the release date. Christmas season has a say. So do finances, profits and the march of technology. There is a window of opportunity where your product is viable, a fixed target that has to be met.Quote:
It's a business I agree, however they have sold a product with problems! (and no offence to CA, quite a few!) And who decides the release date? Isn't it them and SEGA?
There are a lucky few (valve, sid meier) who have sufficient funds that they can dictate their own timescales, but everyone else is all too aware that it doesnt take much to sink a software house. And its usually the ones who are doing something different that are the first to go.
You can say "i shouldnt have to care" all you like. In a perfect world you would be right.
Quote:
Originally Posted by TB666
Ttbeofk the demo was scripted - there were practically no AI actions in it at all.
Tell me why people need to upgrade their hardware when the recommended PC specifications posted by CA for this game are easily met by just about all systems? Turning down the setting does absolutely nothing.Quote:
Originally Posted by Husar
I have a state of the art rig with SLI. This is a bug or some incompatibility with some higher end systems. My system can handle every other game whether it is Doom, Far Cry, or FEAR with the settings cranked all the way up.
There is no denying there is a great game buried in MTW2 but its partially hidden behind some fairly serious balance issues and a mediocre to awful AI on the tactical battle maps and on the campaign.
There is an excuse with software that if you ship it broken you can always patch it later. The legitimacy vanishes when that starts to become be the deliberate action, rather than the unfortunate circumstance.
CA should be experienced enough to know that friggin' with the code, especially the AI which has ALWAYS been their Achilles heel, is quite literally suicidal and whoever made that decision bears the ultimate responsibility for the subsequent disenfranchisement of a substantial proportion of their fan base.
CA promised (again) that THIS time it would be different, we would be awed by the AI on both battle and campaign modes - but yet again it isn't and we certianly are not.
As one reviewer succinctly put it -
I've got plenty enough experience with designing, playing, testing and writing about games to say that I'm aware of the vast majority of "issues" surrounding a game development, testing and release - but come on folks, as much as we LOVE CA for making the series, as much as we LOVE the potential, as much as we LOVE the improvements... what gives with them (CA) messing with the code and releasing it (essentially) untested when they KNOW that AI will ultimately make or break the game for a massive (and it is massive) number of buyers?Quote:
" Yet, while Creative Assembly has addressed some issues, others continue to plague them. Worse, these problems have existed throughout the series and considering this is the fourth game in the franchise and the second with this engine, patience has worn thin to say the least".
I mean, batter your head against a brick wall or what? :wall:
CA, get a grip: your (SP) game is utterly reliant on the capability of the AI, it makes or breaks the entire (sp) game.
And I'm thinking of those members of CA i've spoken to in person and/or interviewed for magazines and I'm thinking "Which one of you was the total Numpti-foo" who made that brilliant decision?
(And I wonder if anybody {still} in the press will ever have the balls to ask them to their face?)
Indeed... but making unit sizes smaller will do.Quote:
Originally Posted by Veresov
It ignores everything else other than unit size it appears to me.
Yup, excellent post. There's too many that accept mediocrity. Maybe it's because the community has a lot of TW freshmen experiencing a TW game's style of play for the first time? I do remember how enchanted I was when I first played Shogun TW. On the other hand maybe for some it's just blind fanboyism?Quote:
Originally Posted by Darkmoor_Dragon
There is a lot to admire with the TW games - they are bold and ambitious and deserve the accolades they've received, but like DD has just posted, the features and graphics aren't really worth much without clever supporting AI to use them. Instead, they really should be playing second fiddle to the AI and that's not really been the case.
I haven't not played M2TW because I'm trying to make a statement to CA or you guys. Rather it's that I'm not satisfied or enjoying the level of competition I'm being challenged with. If it was a MP only game much like BF2142, they at least have the advantage of the AI being done for them. That is not the case with the meat of TW games.
So if we don't agree, we're lumps, newbies or fanboys?Quote:
Originally Posted by Jambo
i don't think that there needs to be a separate research forum. i think the Mod forums should be where things like that go, because to mod you have to research the abilities and functions of the game. after you discover as much as you can you start tinkering. so i think all research threads involving how the money works, how battles play out for strategic definition of the AI, and all of that should go in there. if you just NEED to have another forum, that should be the main tab it is under.
as for all the complaints about bugs and such, i am again reminded of my experiences with SWG. when the game came out people complained about the strength of the AT-AT that the Empire faction could buy, and that the straight up fighting between rebels and storm troopers with the AT-AT support were heavily tilted in the favor of the Empire. they saw it as a bug and complained loudly for balance. in the end, an AT-AT wasn't worth anything more than taking a screenie for role playing purposes. they did very little damage, actually hurt you if you grouped with one because they averaged out your combat level if you were higher ranked than they were, and were easily destroyed by anyone with commando skills.
what the people who chose to be rebels were REALLY complaining over was that they were feeling the pressures of oppression. the Empire was stronger and they didn't like that they couldn't just line up 20 on 20 and win. a lot of the bickering i see over what is a bug/isn't a bug may or may not be. i don't know. i'm not a programmer. i just play the game. but isn't "strategy" all about discovery? if X doesn't work, then try Y? yeah, peasants shouldn't be taking out other more elite units so easily. however, in many of the sims i am reading over, you're throwing them in one on one, and straight up. no flanking. no tricks or skills. however, these ar ethe things that are going to have the most effect, aren't they?
consider this. if you take army A against Army B and sim the battle, what do the stats look like? do they look anything remotely like what your own stats would if you fought the battle yourself? my casulaty rates are always higher on one side, the other, or both. the game sims the two armies and finds the quickest way to rout the other army, not decimate it (which would be a nice option). just clashing front to front while on defense of their home i would expect a peasant army to fight better than their stats might suggest. and let's face it... better weapons and armour doesn't mean more heart, more drive, or more skill. obviously the game isn't programmed with such emotions, but it isn't really that hard to imagine for me based on real life circumstances. history is littered with battles where one side should be crushed, but they either created a phyrric victory for the opponent, or actually defeated them. it wasn't supposed to happen, but it did.
and i do agree the AI is too passive under fire. no one is going to stand there and take a shower of arrows until they stop coming. i keep waiting for a front line charge and it never comes. unless you make a tactical mistake (such as putting your general out front for spearman to find, or turning your backs to the enemy) they just won't charge. what that tells me is taht i need to fight every battle as though i am the assaulter and not the defender. if they attacked me and want to let the time run out, fine. if this doesn't stimulate me enough, i either need to stop playing and do something else, or change the way i play so as to challenge myself.
the original idea behind SWG was "player driven content". there were some dungeons, small quests, and POIs, but ultimately you found a group of people to run with and you made your own adventures. the fact people got bored with it shows me the pitiful state of imagination in our country. the Total War series has moved beyond a simple engine created to entertain you. it has become a highly moddable game that you can play vanilla or create your own fantasy world.
in short, it's shallow enough for a newbie to pick it and play immediately, yet moddable to be deep enough that even the hardened veteran can set things in a way that challenges them. maybe the game is too easy for you right now. how many games of this nature are ever greatness BEFORE the first patch? name me a game like this was NEVER patched at all. you knew it would need patching. you bought it anyway. don't complain because Devs just maybe wanted to hold things back a little so that people would play the game THEY CREATED for a few weeks before releasing the tools necessary to go back and change everything. when you think about it, it could actually be taken as a slap in the face to the R&D. you're only interested in the engine, not the body that came with it. their work is inferior to your own, because you can't wait for someone to "make it better" than the 2 years of developement and programming they put into it. a little patience shouldn't be too much to ask.
and when you can make a game that can be modded over and over again, or played just in it's original form, and still enjoyed by millions and millions of people... i'd say you've pretty much created a masterpiece.
Good work, CA. I, along with many of the veterans of this board, appreciate the game you have brought us and look forward to the possibilities it will unlock for future projects. I'm still waiting for a really good American Civil War game (hint, hint).
Its all déja-vu
Lets dig out some old RTW and MTW thread...
mor dan, you should give a look to Take Command the 2nd Manassas
Quote:
Originally Posted by Doug-Thompson
((sprays Doug with fanboy repellent))
just kidding. There is no need for this type of personalization. Jambo is speaking in generalities not towards you.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Veresov
Uh-uh. No more free shots. No more comments about "accepting mediocrity" and "spraying fanboy repellant" then saying "Just kidding" without a challenge.
However if you removed the script there was plenty.Quote:
Originally Posted by Darkmoor_Dragon
Pre-beta demo unscripted= AI is good, better then in RTW 1.5 and more like what they promised
Gold demo unscripted= the same thing we see in M2TW now.
No, the TotalWar games all have the same basic system which they build upon. I like that system and thus I like the game, if you think the system is mediocre, then don't play it. To find out, you could play Shogun again and see whether you're still enchanted. I once did that before RTW was out and quickly returned to MTW. Why? Because I like progress and improvement, Medieval 2 shows progress and improvement for me while keeping the good basis of the TotalWar series. Bugs and problems are in almost every modern game, I only start to throw the game away if they really make it almost unplayable.Quote:
Originally Posted by Jambo
I'd say people who expect everything to be perfect and exactly like they dreamt of it have lost their connection to the real world.
Easy mate, just trying to inject some humor. I didn't intend to offend you and since I did, I apologize.Quote:
Originally Posted by Doug-Thompson
Thanks for the apology.
I make generalizations too. My generalization is that anybody who plays a game this complex and deep for a leisure time activity is not dumb and deserves a certain level of respect.
In that spirit, I'll edit my post to Jambo and tone it down a bit.
I feel myself that I take every TW game I have played on it's own merits...and try not to get into a versus debate. Course it happens we compare them.
I had areas that didnt please/impress in STW/MTW/RTW....in many ways they share similar points..but they all play differently..and have their own pros and cons. The important part is that the experience was enjoyable..and it was fun.
I think MTW worked...and it was bolstered with a fine expansion pack VI....that really helped breath new life into the game. In 2004 warts and all RTW worked for me...at that time. I also like the unit diversity...playing barbarians was very different to romans, phalanx units..etc etc.
That appealed to me. Who didn't have fun blasting those elephants through a huge AI army of cohorts...flying everywhere! It did entertain...albeit in a flawed way...as did MTW
In some ways BI for RTW wasnt in the same league at VI..but it was still decent enough, and it offered a different way of playing compared to the original RTW. I won't comment on Alexander..didnt appeal to me..and looked a little rushed.
I liked the campaign map on MTW, and the battles of RTW. For MTW2 I am enjoying the campaign map much more this time around....less so battles at present..though this may change.
I wonder how long we have all spent playing these TW games..and maybe we have reached the point where we do need amazing new thrills to really get worked up again? Maybe we have TW 'ed ourselves to death and it just isnt so mind blowingly good anymore?
Are we just changing the piano player..who plays the same or similar song...? Or is it like having chinese every night of the week for a year......love it but you are going to lose some interest after a while?
Doug, I don't think Jambo directed any comment at you. And I am certain that he has tried to enjoy the game; he is not the constant Mr Negative either. I share his thoughts and I have to add that the SP campaign of any of the titles has been marred by the AI. This is the reason why 99% of my TW play has been MP and the reason is simple. For tactical challenge.
Each and every TW has had a poor tactical AI (if I talk AI it usually means tactical due to my lack of in depth knowledge of SP campaign) but I would argue that the STW AI provided the best challenge of them all.
As an example, I have not played any TW game for ages, close to a year. I tried M2TW in a custom battle, I was forgetting commands and all sorts yet I destroyed the enemy and lost only 37 men. Don't get me wrong, SP campaign battles were always too easy to win but CA promised so much with M2TW and even when the blog revealed how they screwed things up with the AI, it also stated that the mistake was known and had been rectified and a patch was promised. Now I don't give a damn that it did not appear with release and I don't really give a damn now, because I don't have the game. But I see the AI as the crucial part of SP and I echo Darkmoor_Dragon, because this is not the first let down. In essence you could argue that Palamedes came here and told us we were buying a game that had just been messed up but of course he also mentioned that patch. The taunt about how the AI on VH would be a real challenge to a TW vet, that was a bit like a dangling carrot.
As long as the AI stands there clueless as it is reduced by arrow fire to levels where victory is impossible, I won't buy it, or at least I will stick to MP.
I think Jambo was referring to the individuals who have constantly posted glowing reports about M2TW, even before it was released. I find this annoying but unfortunately negative posts have to be thoughtfully written. Woe betide us if we dare talk badly of CA or hint at 'fanboyism'. To be honest I am p1$$ed off just like you but for completely different reasons.
I don't mind odd bugs, they seem to be the norm with most PC games (I wouldn't know, I only play TW games) but without an AI there is no game. And what p1$$es me off is that CA tell us the AI is screwed and we see countless "this game is awesome" posts.
I can only conclude they are using auto resolve.
However, Knowing Jambo and also knowing his approach to the game, if he says the game is seriously in need of a patch I would tend to worry for SP.
On the other hand I could buy the game, install the all factions mod and have some fun as the Mongols, there won't be much to stop my horse archers
..........Orda
I strongly believe this is rose-tinted hindsight more than anything else. People are now trying to say RTW was better than M2TW, can you believe that? I mean it's sheer nonsense, but those rose-tinted glasses are magical in what they can do to a person's memory.Quote:
Originally Posted by Orda Khan
Problem is, you and him are the only two who have ever bought MTW1. THe rest of the world really couldn't care less about the game. I got into the franchise with MTW:VI, after an expansion and after all of the improvements, and I still found it kinda alright, nothing earthshatteringly crazy amazing. I agree that MTW2 was rushed, but it is still the best one of the series, by far. You may still prefer MTW1, but if CA followed its original path up to now, you'd still be the only one playing it.Quote:
Well I am one and I think Louis would agree also.....
Yes I have been thinking exactly that since RTW. I have also been through theQuote:
Originally Posted by Barry Fitzgerald
"Why don't you just quit and get a life?" syndrome.
This was going to be my last effort anyway, only 'Mongols Total War' could stir my interest further. Certainly any Napoleonic, American Civil War or similar theme would bore the pants off me
.........Orda
What on earth are you talking about? :inquisitive:Quote:
Originally Posted by SigniferOne
Anyway, rose tinted .......no and go sit in a dark room if you think only two people bought original MTW
.......Orda
Thanks for your thoughtful post, Orda.
If I recall the blogs and the what's been said on this thread and in your post correctly:
The AI was better in the Beta version and then was messed up by a last-minute change attempt. CA promised to fix this mistake in a opening-day patch. The patch is a no-show. Now we have an admitedly bugged battle AI and no patch.
The patch would be released by now except that so many other bugs were found in what should have been a finished product, it's delaying the release of this crucial fix.
I respect that. Certainly, I've lost few battles, have never lost by very much and won one that I definitely should have lost. However, the reason we are in this fix — please correct me if I'm wrong — is because CA attempted an 11th-hour fix after receiving input from players and slipped up.Quote:
Originally Posted by Orda Khan
They should issue a patch. It should include the information necessary to mod the game. However, I think round after round of criticism for an offence they've already admitted to in writing is a little much.
[Edited P.S.: I also believe that the vast majority of other "bugs" reported are attempts to put personal preferences in the patch rather than fix real problems. Allow me to cite an example that I cited myself: I declared a Jihad. It succeeded in a couple of turns, walking through the gates left open by a spy and then taking the city with few loses. I get a message telling me the Jihad's over but with no real victory. I reported this as a bug. After sleeping on it, though, I have to ask -- why should I get the experience points and piety from a Jihad that was no sweat. This might be a bug, or it might be an anti-BS Jihad measure.]
If you vouche for Jambo, that's good enough for me, Orda.Quote:
As long as the AI stands there clueless as it is reduced by arrow fire to levels where victory is impossible, I won't buy it, or at least I will stick to MP.
I think Jambo was referring to the individuals who have constantly posted glowing reports about M2TW, even before it was released.
I haven't found that to be true, unfortuantely.Quote:
I find this annoying but unfortunately negative posts have to be thoughtfully written.
Or anybody who gives CA a break.Quote:
Woe betide us if we dare talk badly of CA or hint at 'fanboyism'.
Fair enough.Quote:
I don't mind odd bugs, they seem to be the norm with most PC games (I wouldn't know, I only play TW games) but without an AI there is no game. (Emphasis added, and I agree.) And what p1$$es me off is that CA tell us the AI is screwed and we see countless "this game is awesome" posts.
I can only conclude they are using auto resolve.
:2thumbsup: There you go. Nothing like cutting a swathe to cheer a guy up.Quote:
However, Knowing Jambo and also knowing his approach to the game, if he says the game is seriously in need of a patch I would tend to worry for SP.
On the other hand I could buy the game, install the all factions mod and have some fun as the Mongols, there won't be much to stop my horse archers
Yes, sing it prole. Completely agree, a dedicated research forum would be wonderful. The good useful threads, general traits, merchant income, charges, Army wide formation techniques are all lost on page 3-5 or further god forbid. The forum is completely filled daily with rants, and there will be two or three more threads started by someone else ranting about the exact same thing. I believe there was even a thread ranting about there being a bug with auto manage. It would be wonderful to have a nice place devoted to understanding the basic rules the game is run on.Quote:
Originally Posted by Proletariat